We get around.

Fort Collins report shows dangers of ignoring cycling laws

As someone who complains often about drivers and pedestrians blocking bike lanes in New York, there is another breed of commuter who draws the ire of pedestrians, drivers, and even some cyclists. For the most part, this scofflaw is the one that drivers cite as the reason for the driver-cyclist animosity: the law-breaking cyclist.

In New York and most other states, cyclists are required by law to ride with traffic – never against it unless there is a contraflow bike lane. In addition, some municipalities outlaw sidewalk bicycle riding for the safety of both pedestrians and cyclists, who are less visible to motorists when in sidewalks and crosswalks. Unfortunately, for various reasons, this law is often ignored. In New York City, the most common law-breaking cyclist is the deliveryperson – someone trying to make their job on a bicycle as efficient as possible. Some wrong-way cyclists do so without knowing they’re breaking the law; while pedestrians are told to walk against traffic when using road space for the sake of safety, the same recommendation does not apply to cyclists. Other wrong-way cyclists ride against traffic out of sheer selfishness: it’s faster than riding around the block, even if it puts other cyclists or pedestrians at risk.

Nearly twice as many broadside accidents (126) occurred when the cyclist rode against traffic than when the cyclist rode with traffic (67).

The #2 contributing factor in broadside collisions between cars and cyclists was that the cyclist rode against traffic on a sidewalk (second only to failure to yield on the part of the motorist).

The broadside – the most common type of accident – was more likely to be the fault of the cyclist than the motorist by nearly a 3-to-2 margin.

One-third of all accidents involved cyclists riding on the sidewalk.

Across all types of accidents, more contributing factors were attributed to cyclists (272) than motorists (261).

What this data cannot demonstrate is just how many cyclists are breaking the rules in Fort Collins. If the majority of cyclists in Fort Collins are law-abiding, that could further prove just how dangerous cycling on sidewalks or against traffic can be (a Hunter College study of New York cyclists suggested that 21% rode on sidewalks or against traffic).

As a cyclist who plays by the rules, I am often endangered by the scofflaws who ride against traffic (forcing me into traffic nearly as often as motorists who park in bike lanes), ride on sidewalks (blindly entering the street while I ride with traffic), and fail to stop at intersections (potentially causing the most violent broadside bike-on-bike collisions). But the data show that not only are law-breaking cyclists a danger to others, they are also a danger to themselves.

An educational campaign to show that these cyclists are putting their own lives on the line to save a couple minutes might go a long way – perhaps moreso than Transportation Alternatives’ valient effort to educate cyclists on the rule of law.

Like this:

Related

4 Responses

The newspaper article in the Coloradoan highlighted the “contributing factors” from cyclists, but failed to mention that in 130 instances in the Broadside collisions (to use the accident type you highlight) the MOTORIST failed to yield Right of Way. In over 20 instances, the MOTORIST failed to stop at the stop sign or red light! In Colorado, a cyclist riding across a crosswalk is defined by state law to be a pedestrian that a motorist much watch out for.

Cyclists should certainly ride in the same direction as traffic for safety, but more effort needs to go into reigning in that bull in the china shop (to use the metaphor from Mikael of Copenhagenize).

Actually, if you look at those statistics again, failure to stop at a stop sign or red light was more likely a contributing factor for broadside collisions on the part of the cyclist than the motorist (32 vs. 18). This was also true against all accident types.

This is yet another commonly-cited critique of cyclists – that they see traffic control devices as “optional.” Again, the statistics show that the laws are there for their own good.

“In New York and most other states, cyclists are required by law to ride with traffic “. Actually, I’m going to go so far as to say that ALL states require cyclists to ride in the same direction as all traffic. BUT (that’s but with a capital b) in most places — including fort collins, as far as i can tell — don’t prohibit cycling on the sidewalk, or by extension, the crosswalk.
It is the duty of the motorist, when making any crossing movement across a sidewalk (i.e. a driveway), or crosswalk to not hit a cyclist (or ped).
here is how it works in Arizona:http://azbikelaw.org/blog/sidewalk-cycling-in-arizona/

I thought the law said rider should Walk bike in cross walk and in other ways act like a pedestrian to get pedestrian’s legal protections.
My guess is that a positive contribution to cyclers’ safety is the belief: “Watch out, some of them are out to get you” which is stronger version of “might get you by accident.” A little paranoia can be useful.

About the Author

Chris O'Leary is a transportation geek who has been reading and drawing maps since the age of 3. He thinks he knows far more than he does, but shares his somewhat informed opinions about mass transit, roads, and urban design here. He was born in Rhode Island and lives in New York City. He hates writing about himself in the third person.